Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41201348›Full record

ArticleAnesthesia and analgesia2026

A&A Pro-Con Debate: Opioid-Free Versus Opioid-Conventional for Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia.

Scott Cao, Mary Daniels, Jennifer M Hah, David Hao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anesthesia and analgesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. In Response.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Scott CaoFrom the Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Mary DanielsFrom the Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jennifer M HahDivision of Pain Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
David HaoFrom the Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

Integrating Tailored Postoperative Opioid Tapering and Pain Management Support for Patients on Long-Term Opioid Use Presenting for Spine Surgery (MIRHIQL)R01DA058694 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jennifer Hah · 2023 to 2026
$4.5M
NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA058694
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

See Article, page 16 In this Pro-Con commentary article, the Pro perspective advocates for the integration of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) techniques in perioperative care, highlighting their benefits, including significant reductions in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Meta-analyses have shown that OFA protocols effectively reduce PONV rates despite variability in protocols and surgical populations. Furthermore, OFA techniques provide effective pain control, often demonstrating analgesic outcomes comparable to conventional opioid-based techniques. Conversely, the Con perspective raises concerns about the increased risk of adverse events associated with OFA protocols, such as bradycardia, hypotension, and prolonged recovery times, as evidenced by large randomized controlled trials. Critics emphasize the lack of standardization in OFA protocols, variability in definitions, and limited timeframe for outcome assessment, which complicates comparisons and generalizability. Additionally, they point out that while OFA reduces intraoperative opioid use, it does not necessarily translate into decreased opioid prescribing at discharge, a key factor in addressing persistent opioid use.

Indexed as

Analgesics, Non-NarcoticAnalgesics, OpioidAnesthesia, GeneralPostoperative PainHumansPostoperative Nausea and VomitingTreatment OutcomeAnalgesics, Non-NarcoticAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID41201348
PMCPMC13160492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.